Truthers And Liars

The 9/11 Liars have a specific set of rhetoric they use, mostly, consisting of ignoring the evidence. For instance, a 9/11 Liar on another forum recently said there was no evidence of explosions at the WTC. This is of course, false, and the liar in question is obviously intelligent enough to know he’s lying.

The reality is, there were hundreds of eye-witnesses to explosions in the building, both before the planes hit and after the planes hit. There were bombs in the basement of the building, thousands of feet below the impact of the planes. In one of the towers, most of the jet fuel blew out the side. The lobby of one of the towers was bombed out, a fact witnessed by numerous people evacuating the buildings.

The NIST report – which took something like 7 years to release – claimed a newly discovered phenomenon which they labeled “thermal expansion” caused one specific beam of WTC7 to collapes, thus causing the entire building to collapse at near free fall speed.

What is the evidence NIST uses to prove this theory?

None. They refused to release their data. It would be a threat to “public safety” if they did.

WTC7 was built in the 1980s, was up to the latest fire codes, yet NIST is claiming that relatively minor office furniture fires caues the building to collapse on itself. They didn’t release the data because the data doesn’t show any such thing. When an Underwriters Lab investigator did a report claiming that the certified steel beams could not have failed due to the fires at the WTC, he was of course, promptly threatened and fired. When the demolitions expert in Arizona gave an interview the day of 9/11, the next day he retracted everything and dropped out of sight. When the European demo expert observed the collapse of tower 7, he said it was an obvious demolition – then was promptly killed in a car crash.

Any scientist who questioned the government’s story of 9/11 was harrassed and fired, ala Steven Jones of Brigham Young University, who found thermetic material in the dust from the building – material that matched a modified form of thermite that had just been patented a few years prior, for the specific purpose of building demolition. This material should not have been in the dust of the towers, but it was. For releasing this information, Steven Jones was fired, physically threatened, offered bribes to shut up, and had a massive media campaign against him.

The 9/11 Liars simply ignore the evidence to come up with a plausible sounding theory that doesn’t actually fit the evidence. While ignorance is rampant among people, most of whom simply don’t know what happened, many of the debunkers – who we know actually get paid to troll online forums – simply engage in what is called “thought terminating cliches.” They used to say, “duh airplanes knocked the building down!” But of course, that’s not what happened – airplanes did not knock the building down.

Then they said that the jet fuel caused the steel to melt. But since jet fuel doesn’t cause steel to melt, they changed the story and said that the jet fuel merely “softened” the steel beams. But that’s doesn’t explain the evidence either because molten steel was found in the rubble a month after the attack. Then, the 9/11 Liars came up with the “pancake theory” to describe the collapse. Except, that doesn’t fit the evidence either, so that was also quietly dropped.

The abuse of Occam’s Razor is rampant among the 9/11 Liars as well. They seem to interpret Occam’s Razor to mean “the simplest sounding story is automatically correct.” That’s not what Occam’s Razor says, of course, and the official story of the collapse of the WTC is only “simple” if you ignore all of the evidence, which the 9/11 liars do.

It’s been 12 years of this. It always fascinated me that the worst 9/11 Liars came from the left, not the right, as might be expected.

That Towers 1, 2 and 7 were destroyed in a controlled demolition is an open and shut case. All of the evidence – from the way the buildings collapsed, to the materials found in the rubble, to the molten steel a month after the demolition, to the eye-witness accounts – show this. It is the prima facie case; the explanation that matches the video, auditory, chemical, physical, and eye witness evidence. The 9/11 Liars have been spinning their wheels for a dozen years, moving from one story to the next, always ignoring the evidence, then follow it up with threats, insults, and accusations.

An analogy: some guy gets stabbed in the arm, and many people witness him being stabbed in the arm. As eveyone is looking at his body, they notice a bullet wound in his head. The Liars then say, “well I didn’t see anyone shoot him, so forget the bullet hole in his head, he obviously died from the stab wound to the arm.” It’s plausible that someone could die from a stab wound to the arm – not likely, but plausible.

But unless you explain the bullet wound in his head, and give evidence of how he died from the stab wound, the simple, Occam’s Razor explanation that fits the evidence is that he died from the bullet in his head.

Share this:

Like this:

Related

Post navigation

18 thoughts on “Truthers And Liars”

While it has no bearing on the physical evidence of the demolition of WTC 1, 2, and 7 – it has always amused me greatly that a survivor of the WTC – one that witnessed the preparation for the demolition, and the demolition itself, was offered a quarter million dollars to be absent during the ten year anniversary, after he had built up a multi-million hit youtube channel and had hours of a documentary film made, including interviews with multiple eyewitnesses and family members of the victims.

Why in the world would three – count them, three – companies offer some random survivor hundreds of thousands of dollars to basically shut up about what he witnessed at the WTC, before and after the demolition? Perhaps it has something to do with all the evidence he saved, the eyewitnesses he knows, and his presumed ability to publicize this information at very inopportune moments for the perps?

I don’t know. I guess it’s one of those mysteries that will never really be solved.

Another common 9/11 Liar trope is that “someone would have noticed the buildings being rigged for demolition.” This is also not true. There was constant construction and maintenance going on at the WTC, as is usual in buildings of that size. Work crews were in and out of the building constantly. We also have another eye-witness, Susan Lindauer, who saw the security tapes of vans and work crew entering the complex in the middle of the night in the weeks leading up to the demolition.

Interestingly, a massive “elevator upgrade” was performed at the WTC a few months before the demolition. There were also “art students” that were bringing in boxes of “art supplies” to various top floors. These “art students” supposedly took windows out of the WTC and built a “balcony” out of one of the windows, and filmed themselves in various poses outside of the building. These “art students” promptly disappeared, of course, but a NYT story – which was even installed as an “art piece” at a museum a few years later – explained the story and published excerpts of their book, which included many photographs of their work.

Here we have an article from “Elevator World,” a trade publication, about the “upgrades” that were done prior to the demolition of the towers.

Here’s a great documentary about Dr. Steven Jones. It includes a record of the threats against him, and even interviews one of the people who made the threats. What is interesting is that the 9/11 Liar who threatened him actually said that if what Dr. Jones discovered was true, he should keep quiet about it, in the interest of “national security.”

You will notice that neither the 9/11 Liar in question, nor any of them, will actually confront any of this evidence, nor even try to explain why a run of the mill physicist would be threatened for merely publishing the results of his test on the WTC dust.

Why? Why won’t the 9/11 Liars – who claim to be able to “debunk” truth rationally – even acknowledge this evidence?

The question answers itself – they know this disproves the official story, so it’s simply ignored. All they can respond with is various hypotheticals and demand that everyone prove a negative.

To any honest observer with an above room temperature IQ, it’s obvious these “debunkers” are simply liars.

The studies scientifically refutes the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) claim that, for the first time in history, fire caused the sudden and complete collapse of a large, fire-protected, steel-framed building on 9/11.

(Note that whereas the Consensus Panel uses a scientific methodology to peer-review its work, the NIST report was not peer-reviewed.)

The first Panel study deals with the NIST computer simulations, which purported to show that fire-induced thermal expansion caused a girder to be pushed off its seat at Column 79, thereby initiating a global collapse of the entire 47-storey building at 5:21 in the afternoon.

However, a recent FOIA request has produced WTC 7 architectural drawings showing that the NIST simulations omitted basic structural supports that would have made this girder failure impossible.

The second Consensus Panel study deals with NIST’s claim that it did not recover any steel from this massive steel-frame skyscraper.

This is extraordinary, given the need to understand why a steel-frame building would have completely collapsed for the first time in history from fire alone, and to thereby prevent a recurrence.

We know now that some of the steel was recovered. Photographs recently obtained by researchers show the strange curled-up paper-thin WTC 7 steel, with a NIST investigator pointing it out.

The third Panel study shows that on September 11, 2001, many people were told hours in advance that WTC 7 was going to collapse.

MSNBC reporter Ashleigh Banfield said early in the afternoon: “I’ve heard several reports from several different officers now that that is the building that is going to go down next.”

Many members of the New York Fire Department were confidently waiting for the building to come down:

Firefighter Thomas Donato: “We were standing, waiting for seven to come down. We were there for quite a while, a couple hours.”

Assistant Commissioner James Drury: “I must have lingered there. There were hundreds of firefighters waiting to — they were waiting for 7 World Trade Center to come down.”

Chief Thomas McCarthy: “So when I get to the command post, they just had a flood of guys standing there. They were just waiting for 7 to come down.”
In addition, CNN and the BBC made premature announcements.

This foreknowledge corroborates the evidence presented in previous Consensus Points (WTC7-1 to WTC7-5) that WTC 7 was brought down by controlled demolition.

“What is interesting is that the 9/11 Liar who threatened him actually said that if what Dr. Jones discovered was true, he should keep quiet about it, in the interest of “national security.”

There is a Family Guy episode where Stewie and Brian go back in the past and prevent 9/11 from happening but when they comeback to the present they see the US ruined by a Civil War. So they go back to the past again and let 9/11 happen because its “good” for America.